Has BioWare Devalued the Video Game?

Earlier this year Dr. Ray Muzyka, co-founder of BioWare, strongly suggested that the ending of the company's new game Mass Effect 3 would be changed through DLC, due to outcry from the series' fans at the game's current conclusion. But does deviation from the game's original artistic vision threaten the integrity of the series, and perhaps gaming itself? Dead Smart Gaming ponders the damage such an move could do, and the worrying precedent it could establish.

Wow, cool opinion piece for once. It is also written extremely well! I have to disagree with the website though, I don't think bioware have devalued the Video Game at all. They are just trying to please the their fans at the end of the day.

Yep. I've said it once and I'll say it again and again if I have to: artists rely on patrons to pay for their art, and gamers are developer's patrons. Art is either for yourself, or for someone else (commissioned), so you're either pleasing yourself for no money or trying to please a consumer.

Bioware is a GREAT developer, and I'm glad I've supported them in the past. They flubbed the ending (imho), and my faith was shaken. If they successfully enhance the ending with their Extended Cut, I'll remain a happy patron for their future titles. Had they told me to flip off, they didn't need my money and this game was their artistic expression and need conform only to their desires, then I'd say, "okay, have fun, good luck, I'm gonna go pay someone else to make games for me because I don't enjoy your art anymore." Is that evil of me? To tell a developer I won't buy their product anymore because the previous product did not please me? I don't see how it could be.

I think that's the precedent that the article is referring to. Is Mass Effect a great series because of it's fans? Is Bioshock? Is Shadow of the Colossus? Etc.

No.

Those games are great because, as you said, they're made by great developers. Fans are not great developers. To be so egocentric that you believe EVERYTHING they do has to adhere to your personal expectations is absolutely ridiculous and not in any way, shape or form conducive to process of creating "art."

If you don't like something, fine. Move on. Hell, if you feel like you're not going to get your money's worth, then don't buy anything from them again. But the day the fans start running the show is the day all artistic integrity is squashed from the industry.

I fully agree with ex right there. Sure games are art to some extent. But Sotc and Mass Effect could not be any different and the other poster used the worst examples possible are games what they are because of their fans?

When usually an artist does art, they release their art into the world and low and behold it could be a hit or not. It's fine overall because you did it because of the art.

When you make sequels, UNLESS u announced a trilogy at first, ( never happens on videogames almost) It's because of the fans. The people who supported you gave you the $$$ and oportunity to rock on and do more of it. When the whole single reason you can do something is because you were financially backed by great fans to do so, your now doing it for them.

People fugging hate call of duty because it's more of the same but most call of duty fans arent asking for changes, it's mostly people who don't play call of duty who do. Yet they wonder how activision makes money.

Kojima said it best that games are great BECAUSE they aspire to please the majority not because they're a vehicle for the artistic ideas of the developers.

Now, games may coincidentally be artistic and appease their consumers but the fact is, that is not why most games are developed, especially when a game's entire shtick is that your decisions matter (e.g. in Mass Effect).

To the guy saying "fans are not great developers" - well guess what? Games are shaped by the fans. If someone makes an abstract game because that was his idea of artistic expression and it is lampooned and destroyed at sales, you can say goodbye to any further sequels.

If you think games are art, then they should NEVER try to appease the consumer. Ever. You want good controls? Forget about it. You want multiplayer? It goes against artistic expression. You want a great plot? Well, that would be too mainstream.

Games are great BECAUSE they have a target audience that they MUST appease, that MUST be satisfied. Otherwise, games aren't successful.

Games are a business first. If they are artistic, that is merely by coincidence.

How is this a cool opinion piece when the author has some crucial facts WRONG?

Bioware is NOT changing the ending. It is providing supplementary material for the ending it already gave us. Nothing has changed. Many fans are still pissed. Others are cautious and wishing that the ending at least explains some of its retardedness - but they still believe that the ending itself is crappy, especially for a game built upon the idea of gamer agency.

BioWare's decision to release downloadable content to change the ending of one of their games isn't devaluing it--it's a direct and considerate attempt at pleasing their fans. There's nothing wrong with that. While I do agree that a video game is a video game, and if you aren't pleased with a certain one, move onto something else. But the ending of Mass Effect 3, according to some gamers, was seriously lacking, and BioWare is making an attempt to please their fans, which I think is very nice of them to do.

If the ending was seriously lacking then why did bioware proceed with the ending then? Surely someone at bioware could have told the writers to change the ending.Tonnes of other games have crap endings which gamers didn't like but you don't see the developers bending over backwards to change it. The reviewers didn't seem to mind the ending either.

Have you considered that perhaps BioWare thought the ending was fine? Maybe there was a dispute over the ending at the company, and the lead designer went ahead and published the game anyway, and now he/she realized they screwed up and need to change it.

BioWare isn't bending over backwards to change it; it's just [optional] downloadable content that changes the ending. Are you seriously complaining over a company actually listening to their fans? Ridiculous.

Seeing as how that was my last bubble, PM me if you wish to discuss this further.

Babbling about precedents and artistic integrity again. The only thing worse than uninformed, redundant bloggers are late, uninformed, redundant bloggers. The ending isn't being changed, it's being clarified. Expect some cutscenes showing the impact your decisions had on the galaxy, nothing more. Hardly enough to "devalue gaming", whatever that means.

Personally speaking yes they have. But not by changing the ending, but by lying to gamers about how the game would have closure to your choices. Which it didn't. Plus many other lies to convince gamers to spend their money on a product that was nothing you said it would be. So them changing the ending to make fans happy is BS.

My problem with bioware is they should just admit they lied and apologize to gamer for calling them entitled whiners. When you blatantly lied to these people.t then lock away part of the game to sell it a DLC when it was already on the disk.

Having been a huge fan of the Mass Effect 3 and Bioware's output in general, (I liked DA2!) one feels the need to point out that while I do not know much about art; I know enough to point out that the ending is no commentary on anything else but itself. The real art was all the work that was put upon creating a universe that has enthralled so many gamers. Clarifying an ending because it lacked narrative coherence has little and nothing to do with art.

If James Cameron thought a DVD extra where Jack survived was worthwhile (and there' plenty of room on the door) then there'd probably be one.

How many times are flims screentested and then changed due to the audiences reaction ? Films like Bladerunner have been changed countless times over the years and yet the integrity of films isn't brought into question (as it shouldn't).

At the end of the day bioware didn't have to release the DLC ending for the fans and could of snubbed them off like other companies would. The sheer fact that they are releasing the ending DLC means i still admire them as a company

Before I say anything I am a massive fan of mass effect to the extent I don't know how many times I have completed 1 and 2 and likely 3 will also get the same attention.

I think what is clearly getting forgotten is that this is a game first, a game where the characters are are a massive part of the whole genre. Yes the art does make a big part of the game but so does the characterisation and I believe it is this where the shear amount of backlash at the ending is being generated from. The shear volume of unanswered questions left at the end ridiculous considering this is a game which was built up from every action has an impact on the world. Therefore all decisions lead up to the ending which leaves a hollow feeling with the series. For instance what happens to the characters at the end, if I remember right I don't think you even find out which members of your team survive the final battle.

p.s Question if anyone can answer...a the end where is Joker off too. This has plagued me since I completed

No reworked ending will satisfy those who want to nitpick everything to death, but there is a chance of redemption here. I'd love to see a new ending personally, but I'm also interested in what they would try to do with what has been established already. I'm going to reserve judgment until I see what Bioware releases next. I'm hopeful as I still love the series as a whole.

Bioware is also doing right by releasing free ME3 multiplayer DLC. They've done it twice now. Capcom charges for every piece of DLC- whether or not the fans give them flak. They appear to be trying to resolve this peacefully, and somewhat low-key right now.